John's OIKONOMIA Thread

[John Reece]

The purpose of this thread is to examine the context and usage of every occurrence of the word oikonomia in the LXX and in the Greek New Testament.

The only occurrence in the LXX is in two verses in a single context:

Isaiah 22

15 Thus says the Lord GOD of hosts, "Come, go to this steward (tamiaV), to Shebna, who is over the household, and say to him: 16 What have you to do here, and whom have you here, that you have cut out here a tomb for yourself, you who cut out a tomb on the height and carve a dwelling for yourself in the rock? 17 Behold, the LORD will hurl you away violently, O you strong man. He will seize firm hold on you 18 and whirl you around and around, and throw you like a ball into a wide land. There you shall die, and there shall be your glorious chariots, you shame of your master's house. 19 I will thrust you from your office (oikonomia), and you will be pulled down from your station. 20 In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, 21 and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your sash on him, and will commit your authority (oikonomia), to his hand. And he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David. He shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. 23 And I will fasten him like a peg in a secure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father's house. 24 And they will hang on him the whole honor of his father's house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. 25 In that day, declares the LORD of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a secure place will give way, and it will be cut down and fall, and the load that was on it will be cut off, for the LORD has spoken." (ESV)

This being the only occurrence of oikonomia in the Greek version of the Old Testament, subsequent posts will present the context and usage of oikonomia in the Greek New Testament.

[Bib Lit Major]

Great subject John! :thumb: This should be interesting!

[John Reece]

Below is the first paragraph in the Preface to A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament, prepared by Barclay M. Newman, Jr.:

This dictionary has been designed for use in conjunction with the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament. It is distinctive, for rather than listing the various meanings of words on the basis of traditional etymological methods which follow logico-historical principles, the different meanings are arranged according to their usage in the New Testament, so that the more central and frequent meanings are given first and the secondary or peripheral meanings follow. Moreover, the meanings are given in present-day English, rather than in accord with traditional ecclesiastical terminology.

Here is the definition for oikonomia:

management of a household; task; work; responsibility; (divine) plan (Eph 1.10; 3.9; 1 Tm 1.4)

We will quote each occurrence of the word in its New Testament context to see how well the above definition conforms to New Testament usage. One context per post, starting with the following:

Luke 16

The Parable of the Dishonest Manager

1 He also said to the disciples, "There was a rich man who had a manager (oikonomon), and charges were brought to him that this man was wasting his possessions. 2 And he called him and said to him, 'What is this that I hear about you? Turn in the account of your management (oikonomiaV), for you can no longer be manager (oikonomein).' 3 And the manager (oikonomoV) said to himself, 'What shall I do, since my master is taking the management (oikonomian) away from me? I am not strong enough to dig, and I am ashamed to beg. 4 I have decided what to do, so that when I am removed from management (oikonomiaV), people may receive me into their houses.' (ESV)

There are three different cognate words in the context above, which are rendered in the ESV as manager (a person), management (an office/job). and be manager (a verb). The differing word-endings are grammatical inflections.

If you find any of the above to be unclear, challenging, or a catalyst for discussion, let’s hear from you.

Blessings,

John

[Rdr. Arsenios]

John Reece:

> Below is the first paragraph in the Preface to A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament, prepared by Barclay M. Newman, Jr.

> This dictionary has been designed for use in conjunction with the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament. It is distinctive, for rather than listing the various meanings of words on the basis of traditional etymological methods which follow logico-historical principles, the different meanings are arranged according to their usage in the New Testament, so that the more central and frequent meanings are given first and the secondary or peripheral meanings follow. Moreover, the meanings are given in present-day English, rather than in accord with traditional ecclesiastical terminology.

> Here is the definition for oikonomia

> management of a household; task; work; responsibility; (divine) plan (Eph 1.10; 3.9; 1 Tm 1.4)

Well, the 'traditional etymology' which this method seeks to avoid, begins with the root meanings:

oiko is house
nomos is law

And we are certainly well within this when we understand 'household', for this is the English equivalent - What is ''held' in 'house-hold' is the rules of the 'house'... And the rule of Christ's household of God is the transformation of the fallen person living according to the flesh and self unto oneness with Christ, and the rule of this is Love, for Christ is God, and God is Love...

So that the household of God is a House ruled by Love... The definition given in your dictionary - [divine] plan - would seem to be exegetical, rather than factual. A household is not a plan, but is the result of one...

Luke 16

The Parable of the Dishonest Manager

1 He also said to the disciples, "There was a rich man who had a manager oikonomon, and charges were brought to him that this man was wasting his possessions. 2 And he called him and said to him, 'What is this that I hear about you? Turn in the account of your management oikonomia for you can no longer be manager oikonomein 3 And the manager oikonomos said to himself, 'What shall I do, since my master is taking the management oikonomia away from me? I am not strong enough to dig, and I am ashamed to beg. 4 I have decided what to do, so that when I am removed from management oikonomia people may receive me into their houses.' (ESV)[/list]

> There are three different cognate words in the context above, which are rendered in the ESV as manager (a person), management (an office/job). and be manager (a verb). The differing word-endings are grammatical inflections.

Greek loves to do this. DIK- is another one. DIK- = right, and a man who is right with God is righteous, and the action of becoming right with God is 'righteousing', which we translate 'justifying'... The literal English, "to rectify", never caught on...

And likewise here, household, householder, and householding, are all stretches that do not carry enough English weight to adequately translate the Greek, yet get lost when words like 'manager' are introduced, which more adequately render the meaning...

geo

[Jaltus]

George,

You are committing a logical fallacy when you take the root of the word for the meaning of the word. Just as ekklhsia does not mean "those called out from" (ek kalew) and just as "butterfly" does not mean "a flying stick of butter," neither does oikonomia mean simply "house rules."

That is the root fallacy. A word does not always mean what its constituent parts mean, and this is a classic example of that. Remember that meaning is based on usage, just as grammar is. There is no recorded usage of the word oikonomia referring to "house rules."

[RevSteve45]

From another Lexicon of mine:

Classical Greek and Septuagint Usage

The word oikonomia is derived from the words oikos, "house," and nemo, "to deal out," or "to administrate." From the rime of Xenophon and Plato it represented household administration, the management of a household or of household affairs. Generallyit is used for the administration of the state and was eventually used to designate every kind of activity that accrued from the position (Goetzmann, "House," Colin Brown, 2:253). It thus takes on the related meanings of "direction, provision," or "administration." The word occurs in the Septuagint only in Isaiah 22:19, 21 with its original meaning of "administration, office."

New Testament Usage
In the New Testament oikonomia may be extended to include management of the property of others, thus becoming "stewardship" (Luke 16:2-4). In the Pauline epistles it denotes the apostle's attitude toward the duties of his apostolic office. In 1 Cor. 9:17 Paul used the word to describe the responsibility of preaching the Gospel entruste him by God as a "commission" from which he could not draw back. ("A dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.") Paul also used oikonomia to designate his responsibility to "fulfil the Word of God" (Col. 1:25) by which he meant he had been entrusted to impart to the Colossians the unfolding of the plan of God that had been consumnated in the Church, the body of Christ. (For a similar passage, cf. Ephesians 3:2)

In Ephesians 1:10 (dispensation of the fulness of times") and 3:9 ("fellowship of the mystery") oikonomia denotes the administration of the plan of God, hidden from eternity in God, by which He, in the fulness of time, will sum up all things in Christ. Finally, in 1 Tim. 1:4, the apostle warned of those who would indulge in speculative knowledge rather than godly "instruction" in faith. With reference to the KJV's translation of oikonomia as "dispensation," Vine's comment is appropriate: "A "dispensation" is not a period or epoch (a common, but erroneous, use of the word), but a mode of dealing, an arrangement or administration of affairs. Cf. oikonomos, "a steward," and oikonomeo, "to be a steward." ( Vine's Expository Dictionary, "Dispensation) (The Complete Biblical Library, Vol. 14, Greek-English Dictionary, Lambda-Omicron, "Oikonomia, pg. 322)

In His Service,
Steve

[John Reece]

Thanks for all the responses above.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Jaltus writes:[/i]

> George,

> You are committing a logical fallacy when you take the root of the word for the meaning of the word.

I think I said that it begins with the roots, with the implication that just as you say, it most certainly does not end there...

> Just as ekklhsia does not mean "those called out from" (ek kalew) and just as "butterfly" does not mean "a flying stick of butter," neither does oikonomia mean simply "house rules."

We like to translate ekklesia as an assembly, or a gathering, or a group of people gathered together, yet it is fairly clear that they are called out from whatever else they were doing so as to be gathered together, so that while the word in a way does not mean "those called out" but an assembly, yet the Greek loves to put an article in front of a description and use it like a noun.

The more general idea is that Greek is the language of verbs, of movement, of events, whereas Latin is the language of administration, of nouns, of categories of things. And of course, both languages have both nouns and verbs...

There is a passage in the Bible where they let the cripple down into a room through the roof, because of the crowding that will not get him in regularly - And the room is described as full of people, and even "the 'in front of the door'" was packed with people, [thereby preventing entry for our crippled man.] Tough translation issue, until we got a Greek in the conversation, who said that all that was meant was the porch or courtyard... But the Greeks won't say that, they will say "the 'in front of the door'"... Can't just give it a name and nounify it - Can't just call it one word... The Latins would...

> That is the root fallacy. A word does not always mean what its constituent parts mean, and this is a classic example of that.

I am certainly not saying that the roots define the word, but that our understanding of the word BEGINS with the roots... Usage is another approach, and contemporary explanations by those speaking the language is another - One school likes to let the Bible usage determine the Biblical meaning of a term, and on and on...

> Remember that meaning is based on usage, just as grammar is. There is no recorded usage of the word oikonomia referring to "house rules."

I never said it means this, but apparently I sounded like I said it, so let me just say I agree with you...

I think it comes from my really limited time, and hurrying to write, and having to run back out for tasks... Plus my general lack of clarity!

And someone [Steve] posted that nomos is not the root word anyway, but nemos - So the whole thing could be moot anyway.

Sure looks like nomos...!

geo

[John Reece]

1 Corinthians 9

15 But I have made no use of any of these rights, nor am I writing these things to secure any such provision. For I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of my ground for boasting. 16 For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! 17 For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward, but not of my own will, I am still entrusted with a stewardship (oikonomian). 18 What then is my reward? That in my preaching I may present the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel. (ESV)

Newman’s UBS dictionary defines oikonomia as management of a household; task; work. responsibility; (divine) plan.

In the context of 1 Corinthians 9:17, how would you render oikonomia? What English word would you use?

[Rdr. Arsenios]

John Reece:

1 Corinthians 9

15 But I have made no use of any of these rights, nor am I writing these things to secure any such provision. For I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of my ground for boasting. 16 For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! 17 For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward, but not of my own will, I am still entrusted with a stewardship oikonomia. 18 What then is my reward? That in my preaching I may present the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel. (ESV)

In the context of 1 Corinthians 9:17, how would you render oikonomia? What English word would you use?

The reasoning here is wonderfully close. And indeed, this whole chapter could almost be laid out entirely in the "Can Salvation be Lost" thread... Oikonomia is what Paul has been charged with by God to do, under divine compulsion, and woe to him should he not, for he is commanded to preach the gospel. And in doing so, he has been granted a stewardship. That stewardship of obedience has set him free to be an even greater slave, and it is from this greater slavery - eg preaching the gospel at no cost, even though that cost [of his food and clothing etc] is his by right, by paying it himself [by his own toil], he obtains a further reward...

Apostleship is a sending by God under compulsion, and it is done as an obedience, not a choice, for it is this which caretakes the household of God. "Feed my sheep..." And not "If you feel like it, would you mind feeding my sheep if it is not too much trouble someday..." These are under compulsion, and thus when they finish their labors, they can only boast no reward, for they only pay what is owed, and their efforts are worthless - because done under compulsion. Paul, by stepping forth beyond what is commanded [that he preach the gospel], gives himself a reward of worth.

It takes a while to see how he says this, and by saying it, he is not denigrating the gift of compulsion unto stewardship [household management of God's house], but showing how the freedom granted of this gift of compulsion can be expanded unto further reward in heaven through suffering additional labors, and indeed even through the suffering of the ascesis of the contest of bodily subjection to mastery, as he discusses at the end of the chapter:

24 Know ye not that those who run in a race all run, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain it. 25 And every man that striveth for mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible. 26 I therefore so run, but not with uncertainty; I so fight, but not as one that beateth the air.Π27 But I keep control of my body, and bring it into subjection, lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway. [TMB]

His efforts, indeed even Paul's efforts, and indeed especially Paul's efforts, are absolutely essential to his salvation, lest having preached, he should be cast away, having failed to attain and keep mastery over his own body...

And yet this would but lose his reward, but should he not preach the gospel, it would be utterly worse for him... ["Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel..." but only "castaway" should he fail to keep his body in subjection."

So the word that works well is "stewardship" - But in my Church, we use the word Oikonomia, and we learn that it has a really wide range of meanings, not the least of which [at least for me who am weak] is "making exceptions to the rule for human weakness, that it be strengthened."

geo

[John Reece]

Thanks, George.

I appreciate your interesting and engaging comments.

Blessings,

John

[John Reece]

Ephesians 1

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan (oikonomia) for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. (ESV)

What do you think of the ESV rendering? What English word would you use for (oikonomia) in the context of Ephesians 1:3-10?

[John Reece]

Ephesians 3

The Mystery of the Gospel Revealed

1 For this reason I, Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles—2 assuming that you have heard of the stewardship (oikonomia) of God's grace that was given to me for you, 3 how the mystery was made known to me by revelation, as I have written briefly. 4 When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. 6 This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
7 Of this gospel I was made a minister according to the gift of God's grace, which was given me by the working of his power. 8 To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan (oikonomia) of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things, 10 so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places. 11 This was according to the eternal purpose that he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord, 12 in whom we have boldness and access with confidence through our faith in him. (ESV)

From The Letter to the Ephesians (Pillar New Testament Commentary), by Peter T. O’Brian:

It is surprising how often in the context of his ministry to Gentiles Paul speaks of the marvelous grace of God given to him (cf. Gal. 1:15-16). In this paragraph he goes out of his way to underscore that grace in a most emphatic way: he uses not only the terms ‘grace’ (vv. 2, 7, and 8) and ‘gift’ (v. 7), but also the verb ‘give’ on three occasions (vv. 2, 7, and 8) when, strictly speaking, it was redundant. In addition to this, the whole passage focuses on the divine kindness to Paul and the Gentiles, who are recipients of ‘the boundless riches of Christ’ (v. 8).

2 The words with which the digression begins, Surely you have heard, imply that some of those addressed were not personally acquainted with Paul. This is quite understandable if Ephesians was a circular letter written to congregations in Asia Minor not known to the apostle and his colleagues personally. To his friends at Ephesus he would probably have written ‘you know’. The content of what the readers should have heard is ‘the stewardship [oikonomia] of God’s grace’ given to Paul in relation to the Gentiles.

The meaning of the term rendered ‘stewardship’ [oikonomia] is disputed here and could refer to Paul’s activity as a steward, his office given him by God’s grace, the administration of the grace given to him, God’s plan and his administration of it, or some combination of these senses. The word is employed in the Pauline letters to denote either: (1) Paul’s administration of his apostolic office (1 Cor. 9:17; cf. 4:1, where he describes himself as one of the stewards of God’s mysteries), of (2) God’s administration of the world and salvation (Eph. 1:10; 3:9; cf. 3:2). In the earlier references Paul is a steward (1 Cor. 4:1), having been entrusted with a commission (1 Cor. 9:17); he is not able to withdraw from this solemn responsibility but must fulfill it obediently. He is a steward of the mysteries of God (1 Cor. 4:1), and it is naturally expected that he be found trustworthy (4:2; cf. Luke 16:2). In the later Pauline texts the emphasis is upon God’s administration. Most examples of this terminology in Paul occur in close proximity to the word ‘mystery’ (the only exception being 1 Cor. 9:17), suggesting that the latter was important for understanding the meaning of ‘administration’ [oikonomia].

Colossians 1:25 is a key verse in relation to the term: it stands between the earlier and later references in the Pauline corpus. In the context of Colossians the word appears to have the twofold sense of God’s plan which is administered by him and, since the apostle speaks of it a ‘given to me’, his assignment or activity. So Colossians 1:25 may be paraphrased: ‘I am a minister according to the plan of God, the execution of which has been conferred upon me in that which concerns you’. In Ephesians 1:10 and 3:9 it clearly has to do with God’s gospel-plan or mystery, together with the divine administration. Ephesians 3:2 is like Colossians 1:25: it mentions particularly the role given to Paul, and this obviously has to do with his making the mystery known. On this view it does not mean God’s salvation plan pure and simple, but the carrying out or administration of the mystery.

When in 3:2 Paul speaks of ‘the stewardship [oikonomia] of God’s grace’ he is thinking not so much of the grace of apostleship (which is mentioned in v. 7 and developed in vv. 8-12) as of ‘the grace of God embodied and proclaimed in the gospel’. To make this gospel known is Paul’s special privilege. Obviously, the two are closely related, but as in Galatians 1 he deals first with the revelation of the gospel (vv. 11-12) and then his commission to preach it (vv. 15-17), so here in Ephesians 3 Paul focuses first on God’s revelation to him of the mystery regarding the Gentiles’ part in salvation (vv. 2-7) before spelling out the means by which this goal is achieved, namely, by his enlightening them about this mystery (vv. 8-12). Divine grace was given not simply for Paul’s personal enhancement. Instead, it was for the sake of the Gentiles, as the following words for you show.

9 The grace of God given to Paul consists not only in his preaching the unsearchable riches of Christ to the Gentiles (v. 8), but also in his revealing to all how God’s ‘hidden purpose was to be put into effect’ (NEB). The keyword that has to do with God’s ‘administration or arrangement’ [oikonomia] is used once again and, as in Colossians 1:25 and Ephesians 3:2, there is a role given to Paul, namely, that of making it known. This activity of enlightening, though certainly related to, is not identical with his preaching the unsearchable riches of Christ to the Gentiles, for v. 9 does not simply repeat what has been said in v. 8.

This verb [fwtizw], which can mean to ‘give light to , shed light upon’ in the sense of showing up something for what it is (cf. John 1:9), is here employed figuratively denoting to ‘bring to light’, and so to ‘reveal or illuminate’, a nuance it has elsewhere in Paul’s letters when it points to the present revelation of something that was previously hidden (1 Cor. 4:5; 2 Tim. 1:10). Here Paul’s task has both a salvation-historical and a personal dimension to it. Regarding the latter, if the longer text is preferred, then the direct object of this enlightening activity is ‘all people’, while the temporal and salvation-historical note is struck by the words which qualify the mystery, namely, that it was ‘previously hidden from eternity’ in God. The content of what is enlightened is the administration of this mystery [oikonomia], that is, how God chose to accomplish his purpose.

As Paul fulfilled his commission of preaching the unsearchable riches of Christ to the Gentiles, so through this proclamation of the gospel men and women came into a relationship with God through his Son, the Lord Jesus. They were joined with Christ in his death and resurrection, and became fellow-members, along with Jewish Christians, of the same body. In this way the previously hidden mystery (described in v. 6) was being implemented in a wonderful manner: God was putting into effect his age-old plan, something that had not been seen or imagined before, and as the apostle to the Gentiles Paul had the great privilege of revealing this magnificent, divine administration to the eyes of human beings on earth, Jew and Gentile alike (all). Paul’s commission, then, contained this second element, not as something additional or unrelated to the proclamation of the gospel but integral to it.

The God in whom this secret had previously been hidden from eternity is the one who created all things. The text makes plain that the God who has redeemed his people and reconciled them through Christ’s death to himself and to one another is the God who created everything. His ‘mystery’, though not understood by men and women, had been planned by him, the Creator, from eternity. Before the foundation of the world he chose a people for himself in Christ and predestined them to be his children (Eph. 1:4-5). He had prepared this plan before the creation and put it into operation at the right time. His act of creation did not in any way militate against redemption and reconciliation. Quite the reverse. It subserved their accomplishment, since all alike take place ‘according to the counsel of his will’ (Eph. 1:11). God has not changed; nor is he abandoning his first creation by forming a new creation in Christ. Salvation and the unity of Jew and Gentile in Christ have always been his purpose (see on 1:9-10); his creation of heaven and earth was an important step in the fulfillment of that plan. And he who created all things in the beginning with this goal in mind will consummate his work of re-creation on the final day when he brings all things together in unity in his Son, the Lord Jesus (1:10).

[John Reece]

Colossians 1

Paul's Ministry to the Church

24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church, 25 of which I became a minister according to the stewardship (oikonomia) from God that was given to me for you, to make the word of God fully known, 26 the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now revealed to his saints. 27 To them God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. 28 Him we proclaim, warning everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone mature in Christ. 29 For this I toil, struggling with all his energy that he powerfully works within me. (ESV)

From Colossians, Philemon (WBC), by Peter T. O’Brien:

oikonomia is employed in the Pauline corpus to denote either (1) Paul’s administration of his apostolic office (1 Cor 9:17); cf. 4:1 where he describes himself as one of the stewards [oikonomoi] of God’s mysteries), or (2) God’s administration of the world and salvation (Eph 1:10; 3:9; cf 3:2). In the earlier references Paul is the oikonomoV (1 Cor 4:1), having been entrusted with a commission (oikonomia; 1 Cor 9:17); he is not able to withdraw from this solemn responsibility, but must fulfill it obediently. He is a steward of the mysteries of God (1 Cor 4:1) and it is naturally expected of him that he be found trustworthy (4:2; cf. Luke 16:2). In the later Pauline texts the emphasis is upon God’s oikonomia. (This need not necessarily imply that the earlier epistles come from a time when Paul had no notion of a divine plan of salvation.) Most examples of the oikonomia terminology in Paul occur in close proximity to the word “mystery” (musthrion: the only exception being 1 Cor 9:17) suggesting that the latter was important for understanding the meaning of oikonomia.

At Colossians 1:25 this nuance of God’s plan, which is administered by him, is most likely for the following reasons: (a) oikonomia tou qeou had this general sense in the Hellenistic world; (b) the genitive tou qeou which is subjective supports this interpretation; and (c) kata (“according to”) suggests the notion of a plan in this context.

At the same time, since the apostle speaks of the oikonomia as “given to me” some commentators have concluded that the phrase must be interpreted exclusively of Paul’s office or activity, his assignment rather than God’s plan which can hardly be said to be given. Perhaps the way forward is to understand that what is given to Paul is insight into that plan, a suggestion probably confirmed by verse 26 with its statement about the mystery being revealed to him and others. If we allow the meaning of “office” to be attached, then it must be done with Dibelius’ comment (24) in mind: “the office stems from the plan.” The double sense seems to be intended as Masson and Reumann have pointed out: Paul says, “I am a minister according to the plan of God, the execution of which has been conferred upon me in that which concerns you” (Masson, 111, 112; cf. Reumann, [I[NTS[/I] 13 [1966-67] 163, and Moule, 80).

If this double sense is intended in verse 25 then the passage stands at an important pivotal point between the earlier and later references. In all three examples in Ephesians (1:10; 3:2, 9-10) oikonomia has to do with God’s gospel-plan or mystery, together with its divine administration, while Ephesians 3:2, like Colossians 1:25, also deals with the role given to Paul in this, namely the making of the mystery known.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Hey, John -

Interesting pericope - what with Christ not suffering enough in the flesh for His body, the Church, and Paul suffering more, and the energizing of Christ within Paul with which he struggles and works and suffers all the more, that the mystery be known...

One of the words that came to mind as I was reading this which I have not seen that is related to oikonomia centrally is the term "condescension", and just as Christ condescended as God to become man, that man might be saved, so also does the Church exercise condescension on the part of Her elders, the perfected ones, that the imperfect whould become mature in Christ. [Col. 1:28b] So that just as Christ suffered on the cross for the apostles and for us all, so also do the mature in Him suffer for the immature in Him, in His body, the Church, that they should mature, and all this according to the great oikonomia of God, which is a great condescension indeed, to us who partake of Him in His holy body, and to those who do not yet partake...

And this condescension, which is Christ's, is given to those who conquer, and they become pillars in the household of the living God, the Church of His holy saints, and it is these pillars, bearing as Paul does here in Collossians Christ within, the very God-bearers, that give the Church her power to birth holiness unto salvation in fallen sinners who turn to her in repentance... These are the pillars of truth in the Church, which is the ground and pillar of truth...

It is nothing less that Christ Himself, in His mature and perfected saints, Who is the pillar and ground of truth in His Own household.... It is in this way that the incarnation of our Lord is ongoing in history... In His one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church, which is a family of communion of persons, and not just a gathering of "like-minded individuals"...

And the mystery is not revealed in words, but in Christ... Whom Paul makes known in power of Spirit...

geo

[John Reece]

Very well said, George :thumb: .

It's too bad common usage of the word "condescend" (implying pride rather than its opposite, humility) is quite other than what you mean by the word. I understand your meaning and quite agree.

Blessings,

John

[Rdr. Arsenios]

John Reece:[/i]

Very well said, George :thumb: .

It's too bad common usage of the word "condescend" (implying pride rather than its opposite, humility) is quite other than what you mean by the word. I understand your meaning and quite agree.

Blessings,

John

As well, condescension entails the notion of 'exception-making', as noted earlier, which means adjusting for the particularity of each and every human circumstance. Such that Christ's becoming man is itself a condescension to the particularity of the human condition that is fallen and post-Adamic, as was everything He did...

geo

[John Reece]

Today @ 03:57 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=119301#post119301)
George Blaisdell:

As well, condescension entails the notion of 'exception-making', as noted earlier, which means adjusting for the particularity of each and every human circumstance. Such that Christ's becoming man is itself a condescension to the particularity of the human condition that is fallen and post-Adamic, as was everything He did...

geo

Yes. :thumb:

[John Reece]

1 Timothy 1

3 As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, 4 nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship (oikonomian) from God that is by faith. 5 The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6 Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion, 7 desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions. (ESV)

From The Pastoral Epistles (NIGTC), by George W. Knight, III:

oikonomian (א A G and a few other Greek manuscripts, syrh, TR) is to be preferred to the textual variant oikodmhn (D* it vg syrp, h(mg) Irenaeuslat; oikodomian in Dc), “building “or “edification,” not only as the more difficult reading but also the best attested. The understanding of oikodomia not only here but elsewhere (Lk. 16:2, 3, 4; 1 Cor. 9:17; Eph. 1:10; 3:2, 9; Col 1:25) has presented a problem. Its literal, and original, meaning is the work performed by an oikonomoV, a “steward” or “manager.” This idea of stewardship on God’s behalf Paul applies to himself (1 Cor. 9:17; cf. also Tit. 1:7). The meaning “arrangement, order, plan” (BAGD); O. Michel, TDNT V, 152) has also been proposed for the term; this view is influenced by the possible meaning of the word at some points in Ephesians (e.g., Eph. 1:10). A third meaning suggested for our passage (BAGD: Michel, 153), namely, “training or instruction,” appeals to Clement of Alexandria, who uses the term in this way (Paed. 1, 8, 69; 70, 1). Perhaps a reexamination of the arguments in the light of the context can bring some resolution.

Alford argues that the predominant usage in the NT, and especially in Paul, as evidenced by Ephesians, is that of “plan” (so TEV, NEB). To the objection that the verb parecousin governs oikonomian and would seem to require not God’s plan but its administration, it is answered that this is an example of zeugma (one verb having a different force with different subjects in one context) and that the contrast here is more between God’s plan and human folly than between human folly and a divinely given stewardship. Those favoring either “administration” or “training” argue that the verb is significant for determining the meaning. Those favoring “administration” or “stewardship” say that the divine outworking is what is primarily in mind in the use of the term in Ephesians and Colossians (cf., e.g., Col. 1:25: oikodomia has been given to Paul [thV doqeishV moi eiV umaV]) and is furthermore the meaning in the sole occurrence of the noun oikonomoV in the Pastoral Epistles (Tit. 1:7).

Reumann, in a very helpful article (“OIKONOMIA – Terms”) may, in his proposal for some of the usages in Colossians and Ephesians, have provided the clue for the meaning here. He proposes (as did C. F. D. Moule, Colossians and Philemon) that in Col. 1:25 oikodomia may refer to “God’s administration, as well as the apostle’s administrative activity” (p. 162). God’s oikodomia is certainly in view in 1 Tim. 1:4, as the qualification qeou makes plain (genitive of possession), but it is, at the same time, one that must be responded to and that is operative in the realm of faith (thn en pistei. Further, this oikodomia is in v. 5 called paraggelia, i.e., “apostolic instructions with divine warrant.” Since the concept seems to be set in such a context not only here but also in Ephesians, where it is spoken of as being brought to light or communicated (Eph. 3:9), it seems that neither of the two extremes is in view here, i.e., God’s plan without reference to human stewardship, or Paul’s stewardship in the most specific sense. Rather, what is referred to is the outworking, administration, or stewardship of God’s plan of salvation through the gospel and its communication (cf. 2 Tim. 1:9, 10: “God’s purpose . . . . revealed by . . . our Savior Christ Jesus . . . brought to light through the gospel.” NASB).

The heterodoxy of the false teachers’ speculation is, then, contrary to the furthering of God’s administration, which is brought about not by speculation but en pistei (for pistei with en cf. 2 Thes. 2:13): With the definite article thn Paul ties oikodomian with en pistei and indicates the realm in which the administration is accomplished. en should not be taken as referring to initial saving faith only, but to the trust relationship that is the seedbed in which God works and produces growth. That this wider view of faith is in view is seen by the fact that it is returned to in v. 5 as one of the means that Christians must use to bring about the goal of the oikonomia and the attendant paraggelia [an instruction, charge, command -JR], namely, agaph [love -JR].

[John Reece]

The last post above concludes the project of examining the context and usage of every occurrence of the word oikonomia in the LXX and in the Greek New Testament.

Blessings,

John

[Bib Lit Major]

Thank you John :thumb:

[John Reece]

Today @ 06:15 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=120314#post120314)
Bib Lit Major:

Thank you John :thumb:

Thanks for your response, BLM. Its nice to know I'm not alone in valuing and benefiting from these studies :smile: .